I.

TIME DEIXIS Different ways of using time deixis in Bulgarian and English: Deixis is reference by means of an expression whose interpretation is relative to the extralinguistic context of the utterance, such as who is speaking, the time or place of speaking, the gestures of the speaker, the current location in the discourse, etc. Sometimes languages differ in their way of pointing out certain portions of reality and as a result translation in such cases is a matter of some difficulty so that a variety of translation procedures is required. For example, Bulgarian and English use different ways of expressing days in relation to the moment of utterance: English expression Literary Bulgarian translation Bulgarian equivalent expression

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

the other day the day before yesterday the day after tomorrow next Sunday last summer a forthnight ago Sunday week

In examples 1,2,3,4,5 and 7 we use the translation procedure of substitution because in both languages the same referent exists. In example 6 we need another procedure, explanation, because no notion of forthnight is present in Bulgarian. Another telling example of using time deixis differently in Bulgarian and English is the reported (indirect) speech. Tense shifts appear in English whereas in Bulgarian no such changes can be detected. English tense shift /shifted verbs are in bold/ 1 2 3 She said that she always drank coffee He explained that he was reading a book He said that Bill had arrived on Sunday ... Literary Bulgarian translation , , , ... Bulgarian equivalent expression , , , ...

Substitution is needed here as well in order to translate these sentences correctly. Nevertheless, another, slightly unexpected, change is obligatory in Bulgarian as can be observed in the sentence bellow where the corresponding verb in direct speech is in past tense: A. (arrived) , . vs. B. , ( is arrived) .

A specific member of the grammatical category of Mood exists in Bulgarian language which emerges in cases like the above mentioned (e.g. when we report past tense statements). It is the so called Conclusive mood which we use in sentences like B. A further speculation on what causes such a shift of mood while, as a rule, expressions of time and grammatical tense should change could possibly lead us to another level of Linguistics functionalsemantic fields. We can draw a conclusion that the speaker usually witnesses the performing of a present tense action while a past tense action is never witnessed by the one who reports the speech. Thus one can obtain this information only by the means of conclusion (listening to a probable viewer of the past action). What I mean here is the following: The speaker who says has obviously seen Bill arriving on Sunday. The speaker who says ... ... obviously has not seen Bills arriving but concludes that Bill has arrived after receiving the information from the first speaker. In such cases in Bulgarian the marked member of Conclusive mood acts to support the reporting of an utterance. Another interesting observation is that, in contrast to tense shifts, which are obligatory in English but never detected in Bulgarian, a shift of words and expressions of time is needed in both languages for a semantically correct sentence to be formed when one reports speech. Consider the following example: C. English: I saw him today, she said. vs. She said that she had seen him that day. D. Bulgarian: , . vs. , (same day). where, in fact, that day and same day ( ) act as semantically equivalent deictic tools.

II.PRESUPPOSITION 1.- , , . ? , ? () - , . By saying Lillebror () triggers a presupposition that Karlson exists and this is what makes his parents angry because they dont believe it. By saying he triggers the presupposition that his parents have asked him the same question (presumably Who broke the steam-engine?) at least twice and this is what makes Lillebror angry. 2. - . ? . . . ? . ? . ?

 - implies that Karlson owns at least one steam-engine and this presupposition is what astonishes Lillebror and makes him as enthusiastic as he inquires ? While answering this question Karlson immediately triggers another presupposition and provokes another question thus keeping Lillebror intrigued continuously: . . This time the presupposition is that he lives somewhere up and it is instantly followed by the next inquire: ? 3. - ! -. ! , , . : , . - ? . - . . When Karlson says , , e, he triggers presupposition that he also holds some paintings and thus provokes Lillebror to inquire .

III.IMPLICATURE 1.- , . - a - , , ? - , , . In this conversation Lillebror forces his parents to give a promise not to talk to Karlson about the steam-engine thus making an implicature that a possibility exists for the parents to meet Karlson. However, it is not decoded by his older brother Betan who puts the reasonable question , . Betan couldnt decode the implicature because Lillebror flouts the Maxim of manner, Be orderly: he puts the facts in the reverse order and doesnt manage to create the presupposition my parents are to meet Karlson after while. If he had stated the facts orderly as follows: a.Karlson is in my room in this moment. b.Im going to introduce my parents to Karlson. c.Im afraid they are going to quarrel with him reproaching him for the broken steamengine. d.I want them not to do that. e.Ill make them promise not to talk to Karlson on the matter of the steam-engine. it would have been clear for Betan what the presupposition and the implicature were about. By saying Lillebror creates an implicature that he believes his parents are angry with Karlson for his living on the roof which implies that Lillebror doesnt realize his father is angry with Lillebror himself for the broken steam-engine. Here, he unconsciously flouts the Maxim of relation Be relevant

IV.SPEECH ACTS Performatives (saying is doing) have the same communicative function in both English and Bulgarian. However, a probable difference may exist between some components of the context in which a performative is used. Let us consider the act of ordering. According to Guy Cook, utterances will only be perceived as orders if certain (felicity) conditions are in operation by both the sender and the receiver (...): 1. 2. 3. 4. The sender believes the action should be done. The receiver has the ability to do the action. The receiver has the obligation to do the action. The sender has the right to tell the receiver to do the action. (see Cook 1989)

It is possible for some of these conditions to be fulfilled in situations which differ in the UK and Bulgaria. For instance, in both countries there are laws concerning peoples rights and obligations at their place of work and enact who has the right to order. However, in Bulgaria many give orders without having the right to do it and despite all people usually comply with such requests. The latter happens when personnel are not aware of their own rights and obligations. As a conclusion and in addition to Cooks four Felicity condition we may postulate another one, valid in certain cases, that is: 5. The receiver believes that the sender has the right to tell him to do the action.